1. osu!community
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps
posted
This beatmap was submitted using in-game submission on martes, 03 de octubre de 2017 at 09:12:00 p.m.

Artist: adaptor
Title: LAISSEZ:FAIRE
Source: nanobeat
Tags: osu!International Mapping Contest o!imc #1 Artcore Voli Nhawak Irreversible #SRV Sassy Ravioli Vortex
BPM: 200
Filesize: 7516kb
Play Time: 02:14
Difficulties Available:
  1. Geroliversible's Hard (3.58 stars, 338 notes)
  2. Nhawakversible's Extra (5.85 stars, 749 notes)
  3. Normal (1.99 stars, 179 notes)
  4. Voli's Insane (4.78 stars, 536 notes)


Download: adaptor - LAISSEZ:FAIRE
Information: Scores/Beatmap Listing
---------------
Gero | Voli | Irreversible | Nhawak
posted
#SassyRavioliVortexTeam
posted
#srv represent
posted
Congrats on 2nd place \o/
posted
i like the " a l m o s t " thing xD
posted
posted

Nhawak wrote:

sad ;; this is my fav entry so far congratz all of you! <3
posted
[Normal]
  1. 00:33:392 (3,4) - mhh, stacks might be confusing to new players
  2. 00:34:892 (2) - i'd only place a circle instead of a slider for a better rhythm imo
  3. 00:47:342 (4) - looks a bit like a cluster, i'd point that slider upside down to make it more clear
  4. 00:50:492 (1,2) - i really don't know if this is readable for newer players aaa ;_;
  5. 00:51:542 (3,5) - aesthetics, don't let them overlap :D
  6. 01:14:492 (1,1) - ^


[Hard]
  1. 00:47:792 (4,5) - mhh, maybe ctrl+g is less confusing


[Insane]
  1. 00:07:817 - might wanna map this sound here, up tp you :o
  2. 00:42:692 - ughh, replace this with a circle, cause there is no sound on the sliderend D:
  3. 00:57:692 (1,2) - hitsounds are soooooo quite compared to the part before D:
  4. 01:01:742 (8) - i don't get this spacing


[Extra]
  1. 00:17:492 (3,4) - spacing is the same as in the 1/2 gap before
  2. 00:27:392 (1,1) - why the NCs? those are no special sounds that need to be emphasized imo :o
  3. 00:50:192 (7,8,9,10) - i think you can NC this and higher the spacing


very cool song and mapset, i like it a lot \ :D / good luck on this!!
posted
requested I mod this

Extra

00:58:142 (3) - Considering how you switch between distance on the timeline but not visually it could lead to readability problems. Especially since you use the same ds for 00:59:042 (6,7) - Also 00:58:742 (5,6) - and 00:57:692 (1,2) - have the same situation going on. Different spacing on the timeline, but same visual distance. Easy fix would be to put NC on 00:58:142 (3) - and 00:59:042 (6) - as it would let the player know these notes are different snapping.

01:02:492 (1,2) - The antiflow from 1-2 makes no sense considering how they're both the same sound, which is complimented by the symmetry. What I'm basically saying is these are the same sound, so it would make sense that they play the same. 01:02:342 (2,1) - Has linear flow, so 2 should as well to follow your established idea. https://puu.sh/xHden/0aa87c491e.jpg What I did was copy and horizontally flip 1 to blanket the upcoming slider. It keeps the symmetrical compliment and flows similarily to 1.

01:07:292 - This spike in rhythm density could be off-putting to play as it's just a repeat of the rhythm already mapped by Irre, but more dense. The rhythm doesn't have to be accurately consistent (variations work) but there should be a common focus that both mappers should compliment. What that means is both mappers should map the same important sounds / highlights the, but add there own variation of the pattern used. Since this is a collab modders will be more lenient about this, so keep in mind the rhythm doesn't have to be exactly the same throughout the whole section from Irre's to Nhawak's
Some examples as to what I feel could be fixed applying this knowledge;

-Ex. 1: 00:59:342 - Irre does not map the 1/4 here, basically telling the player they don't have to focus on this layer. 01:08:792 (3,4,1) - The player won't anticipate the 1/4 here because they weren't told to listen for it by Irre's mapping. You don't have to remap this part here, as everything but 4 still fits here, as the beats mapped here are still following the guidelines created by Irre's section.

-Ex. 2: 00:58:442 (4,5) - Irre didn't map those subtle claps on the white ticks. Instead, he chose to map the piano on the 1/2. 01:07:892 (3,4) - For this section, the white ticks are mapped instead of the red ticks. Mapping the rhythm based on the important sounds compliment by Irre, what should be mapped is the 3 red ticks highlighted. I won't give you an exact answer for this as there are multiple ways to interpret this part, but remember the important of those 3 red ticks, as that will encourage consistency while keeping the player interested with your style.

-Ex. 3:01:00:242 (3) - Irre maps the a reverse slider starting on the red tick. The rhythm he complimented here can be interpreted as 3 equally sounds, or 1 strong sound, and 2 lesser ones. 01:09:692 (1,2) - Two 1/2 sliders. Two strong sounds, ending on weaker ones. Not to mention 1 starts on a white tick, which the player won't be listening for since Irre didn't map this sound here. Again, multiple ways to interpret, but stay within the guidelines established by the previous section, but at the same time add your own variation / twist to the map to keep it interesting.

01:24:092 (1,2) - This feels overmapped to me because there's no sound at 01:24:392 - that feels as important as the sound at 1. My suggestion is to decrease the sv of 1 to .4 through the .osu to keep the emphasis on 1 while still accurately mapping the sound that starts and ends at 01:24:542 -

01:25:292 (1,2) - ^

02:14:492 - Gero: I HELPED WITH THIS DIFF


Hard

00:47:342 (3,4,5) - The player won't be able to anticipate this overlap because they're fixed on this idea of linear patterns, and lack of overlaps. Throwing this at them at a casual part of the song would throw them off. I suggest stacking 3-4 on 5 as a simple fix for better readability.

02:09:092 (1,2,3,4) - Similar situation as pointed out before, this pattern might be unexpected, considering how there are no repetitive jump patterns in the map, the player might confuse this as two stacks as mapped before back at 00:17:492 (2,3,4,5) - The fix I suggest is to ctrl+g 02:09:242 (2,3) - to make these notes two stacks for better readability.


Normal

00:41:942 (3) - Note is slightly cut off screen, which is problematic according to the criteria. I can't think of a simple fix so you might have to redo the pattern.
https://puu.sh/xHfEM/0ca1524615.jpg This is what I came up with. It's the same rhythm, tho slightly changed to better fit on screen. I highlighted 4 and 5 because I had to slightly adjust them to make this pattern work. Other then that this pattern fixes the offscreen note.


Insane

This diff is good, but just one thing stuck out to me.

00:51:242 (4,1,2) - I can see the symmetry, but it doesn't fit here and I'll explain why.

Generally speaking mappers use symmetry to compliment a part of the song to show repetition / correlation. Now with that logic you could say it fits here because of the repetition of 1/2 sliders, however the shift at 00:51:467 - which called for that nc makes splits this section of the song, so the correlation of the patterns 'reset' if that makes sense. My point is you don't show correlation when the sounds you're mapping aren't correlated. https://puu.sh/xHgxj/a22b216351.jpg Using your structure I tried creating a better complimentary pattern along with a new nc pattern. (I increased the AR so you could see all the notes) Personally I didn't think symmetry would be the most interesting choice, instead I decided to compliment the repetion through a cycling pattern.


gl with the set
posted
Fatfan Kolek
[Normal]
  1. 00:33:392 (3,4) - mhh, stacks might be confusing to new players They're perfectly fine.
  2. 00:34:892 (2) - i'd only place a circle instead of a slider for a better rhythm imo Why?
  3. 00:47:342 (4) - looks a bit like a cluster, i'd point that slider upside down to make it more clear Moved.
  4. 00:50:492 (1,2) - i really don't know if this is readable for newer players aaa ;_; I'll get more opinions about it.
  5. 00:51:542 (3,5) - aesthetics, don't let them overlap :DFixed.
  6. 01:14:492 (1,1) - ^ Same as above.


[Hard]
  1. 00:47:792 (4,5) - mhh, maybe ctrl+g is less confusing I really like this pattern, and I don't think that this is so confusing.
Bubblun
requested I mod this

02:14:492 - Gero: I HELPED WITH THIS DIFF YES, COPYRIGHT.


Hard

00:47:342 (3,4,5) - The player won't be able to anticipate this overlap because they're fixed on this idea of linear patterns, and lack of overlaps. Throwing this at them at a casual part of the song would throw them off. I suggest stacking 3-4 on 5 as a simple fix for better readability. This is one of my favorite patterns in the difficulty. I know that it could be a bit difficult, but I'm pretty sure that the stack leniency would help with that to avoid any possible confusion while playing it.

Normal

00:41:942 (3) - Note is slightly cut off screen, which is problematic according to the criteria. I can't think of a simple fix so you might have to redo the pattern.
https://puu.sh/xHfEM/0ca1524615.jpg This is what I came up with. It's the same rhythm, tho slightly changed to better fit on screen. I highlighted 4 and 5 because I had to slightly adjust them to make this pattern work. Other then that this pattern fixes the offscreen note. Fixed.

gl with the set


Thanks a lot.
posted
Updated~
posted
Hi, congratulations on the 2nd place! o3o
I am going full savage in this mod as I had to play the set with my broken equipment and everybody seems to demand from me to be able to play every kind of Extra diffs even though I am a firetrucking 80K easy player, so I will not be merciful at all! :3

General
  1. The storyboard names are incredibly disturbing and may cause the epilepsia attack. I highly recommend you turn on the storyboard warning.
  2. As far as the spread is concerned the differences between Hard, Insane and Extra are very well executed. Sadly, I can't say the same about the difference between Normal and Hard. Hard is really note-heavy and the number of triples is incredibly overwhelming when compared to such a delicate Normal, not to mention the huge change of the speed of the SVs. Of course, I understand the tempo is really high and the difference between these diffs might be a bit stretched but in my opinion the difference is unacceptable. The Advanced difficulty that would be less dense than the Hard but harder than the Normal would be highly appreciated!
  3. Can you please silence the sliderslides? They are quite annoying to me. x'D


Extra
  1. Why is HP set to just 6.2 guuuuuuuyyyyyys do you want noobs like me or, even worse, farmers to be able to pass this map without putting any effort in it while playing the map? Rise it to 6.9-8.2 please, now everyone can pass it, be it either the player cannot feel the rhythm or they suck at playing this game so hard.
  2. 00:00:992 (1,1,2) - Yooo these are really not intuitive at aaaaaall...
  3. 00:06:542 (2) - Is that offscreen enough to be unrankable or not? It's been like that in the 1024x768 windowed resolution.
  4. 00:39:242 (2,2) - As far as I understand the first notes to be the sliders the sounds here on the highlighted notes would work way better as the circles but ofc in a way that would actually overlap in the current way. I hope I am talking in a clear way. x'D
  5. 00:40:142 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - Yooo that would've played a trillion times better if that got CTRL+G'd. The flow is broken for now.
  6. 00:40:892 (1) - For Lord's sake do you want me to tilt so hard I get a heart attack? I am literally SMH rn, just rotate it for 180 degrees and place it the same manner so the sliderend stacks with 00:41:342 (2) - this note's sliderend. I just want it to flow naturally and not in a stupid way like it does rn.
  7. 00:41:942 (4,1) - Also it will work nicer if you change the order of the sliders.
  8. 01:10:442 - I know why there is a break here but still I think it would work smoother if there were a circle. :<
  9. 01:24:092 (1,2) - 01:25:292 (1,2) - Yeah, totally readable at first time and totally catchable, surely, yeah, aha. No.
  10. 01:37:742 (4,5,6,7,8) - How about anything more aesthetic? ;_;
  11. 01:55:292 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3) - This is executed very well but these sudden triangles threw me back, I am not sure how to describe it, like, the triangles haven't been present before and now the intensity of these is... hm... just lol. LOL

    Quite nice difficulty you've got there. I like the fact that this difficulty has 169 sliders. o3o


Insane
  1. 01:16:892 (1) - There is no storyboard name since here and I think it is an error.
  2. 02:10:892 (1,2,3,4) - This is very weird to click for me, like, I do not understand the logic of clicking it and I can't really hear anything that needs to be clicked this way. ;_;


Hard
  1. 02:09:092 (1,2,3,4) - For me this is really hard to catch as the crossing doubles instead of the regular ones, is it possible to make them less jumpy? XD


Normal
  1. 00:46:892 (2,3,4) - LOL, Gero please, that is not even close to the acceptable level of being okayish for the easiest difficulty. Just look how cluttered it is, noobs won't know how to click it and what to click next and what should be clicked as the first note here. x3x
  2. 00:55:292 (3,4,1) - So this pattern is nicer than the previous I have selected but still it is so-so.


Good luck guys!
posted
Krfawy
Hi, congratulations on the 2nd place! o3o
I am going full savage in this mod as I had to play the set with my broken equipment and everybody seems to demand from me to be able to play every kind of Extra diffs even though I am a firetrucking 80K easy player, so I will not be merciful at all! :3

General
  1. The storyboard names are incredibly disturbing and may cause the epilepsia attack. I highly recommend you turn on the storyboard warning. There are no flashes, I think that's not even necessary to be enabled, but turned on.
  2. As far as the spread is concerned the differences between Hard, Insane and Extra are very well executed. Sadly, I can't say the same about the difference between Normal and Hard. Hard is really note-heavy and the number of triples is incredibly overwhelming when compared to such a delicate Normal, not to mention the huge change of the speed of the SVs. Of course, I understand the tempo is really high and the difference between these diffs might be a bit stretched but in my opinion the difference is unacceptable. The Advanced difficulty that would be less dense than the Hard but harder than the Normal would be highly appreciated! We've discussed about it already, and Irreversible told us that the spread is perfectly rankable, and fine, so in this case should be fine to keep it like that. Also let me mention that we've changed a lot of times before send it to the judges to make the spread as fine as possible.
  3. Can you please silence the sliderslides? They are quite annoying to me. x'D Sure.


Normal
  1. 00:46:892 (2,3,4) - LOL, Gero please, that is not even close to the acceptable level of being okayish for the easiest difficulty. Just look how cluttered it is, noobs won't know how to click it and what to click next and what should be clicked as the first note here. x3x
  2. 00:55:292 (3,4,1) - So this pattern is nicer than the previous I have selected but still it is so-so. I changed both a little bit.


Good luck guys!
posted
Updated~

posted

Fatfan Kolek wrote:

  1. 00:27:392 (1,1) - why the NCs? those are no special sounds that need to be emphasized imo :ofixed!


very cool song and mapset, i like it a lot \ :D / good luck on this!!
Fatfan <3 meld dich mal bei mir in discord bby :o:(
posted
fatfan kolek

Fatfan Kolek wrote:

[Insane]
  1. 00:07:817 - might wanna map this sound here, up tp you :oyea
  2. 00:42:692 - ughh, replace this with a circle, cause there is no sound on the sliderend D: no, even if theres no piano sound, theres still percussion and would you really wanna kill this pattern by doing that?
  3. 00:57:692 (1,2) - hitsounds are soooooo quite compared to the part before D: fixed
  4. 01:01:742 (8) - i don't get this spacing what about it?
bubblun

Bubblun wrote:

Insane

This diff is good, but just one thing stuck out to me.

00:51:242 (4,1,2) - I can see the symmetry, but it doesn't fit here and I'll explain why.

Generally speaking mappers use symmetry to compliment a part of the song to show repetition / correlation. Now with that logic you could say it fits here because of the repetition of 1/2 sliders, however the shift at 00:51:467 - which called for that nc makes splits this section of the song, so the correlation of the patterns 'reset' if that makes sense. My point is you don't show correlation when the sounds you're mapping aren't correlated. https://puu.sh/xHgxj/a22b216351.jpg Using your structure I tried creating a better complimentary pattern along with a new nc pattern. (I increased the AR so you could see all the notes) Personally I didn't think symmetry would be the most interesting choice, instead I decided to compliment the repetion through a cycling pattern changed it in a different way

gl with the set



ok, thanks!
https://voli.s-ul.eu/xXqwDpIW.osu
posted
Updated~
posted
hi Lasse 👀

[Normal]
  1. 00:02:192 (4,5) - esta blanket puede mejorarse
  2. 00:23:792 (3,4,1) - es la unica parte donde haces este custom stack, mejor quitalo, no encaja con el resto del mapa xp
  3. 00:34:892 (2,3) - por que los haces diferentes? se miraria mejor si tuvieran la misma forma rotada uwu
  4. 00:51:542 (3,5) - deberia estar facil evitar ese overlap
  5. 01:05:792 (2,3) - la blanket puede mejorar
  6. 01:40:892 (1) - tu tiendes a curvar mas los sliders, esto se ve muy fuera de tu estilo


[Nhawakversible's Extra]
  1. 00:06:542 (2) - This goes off-screen on 4:3 resolutions (must fix)
  2. 01:44:642 (2,4) - this blanket can be improved


That's it, call me back when the spread is fixed cuz rn I don't trust the gap between Normal & Hard lul
posted
I personally find the spread fine, object count/density ramps up quite linearly: 177 - 344 - 536 - 751. That means it increases in increments of about 200 every difficulty, consistently. While object count isn't everything, 1/2 is introduced in Normal, 1/4 is introduced in Hard. This being a 200 bpm song with lots of 1/4 notes doesn't really make it a super good fit for a high amount of low difficulties either. The Hard already feels very simplified.

Also, I don't know what the others' opinion is, but I personally find it a bit lame to include a difficulty that wasn't part of the contest mapset, unless it's absolutely needed.
posted
While modding I noticed the star gap. While it doesn't break any criteria rules, the gap is large, and could call for another difficulty.

HOWEVER as the only thing broken here is a guideline "The difficulty spread should be linear and reasonable." it's up for debate.

I agree with Voli's point, as gameplay elements (Such as 1/2 rhythm building up to 1/4) proves the spread was thought out. While I don't think the last bit Voli mentioned about a 200bpm map not good for low difficulties really matters, the Hard already advances the normal, despite the star rating.

If you actually look at the Hard, you'll see it's gameplay elements aren't that different from the Normals besides the occasional 1/4 rhythm. And whenever 1/4 rhythm is present, it's simplified into a stack or a buzz slider. I'm really just supporting Voli when I say this; Hard is already simplified to the extent the music allows it to, so to make a new diff really wouldn't provide any new content besides simply a hard with smaller spacing.
Please sign in to reply.